Business

The Death the Mutual Fund: Matthew Murawski Explains Why ETFs May Be a Fit as Part of Your Investment Strategy

Published

3 years ago

November 9, 2022

Since the Great Depression, mutual funds have presented a great opportunity for everyday people to invest in the stock market. Rather than risking their fortune on individual winners and losers, investors selected groups of stocks, making them not only a more diversified investment but also more attainable to people who could not afford the high commission fees, in Murawski’s opinion.

And for decades, mutual fund investing has been touted as a smart, principled financial planning strategy. However, those days may soon be coming to an end. As Goodstein Wealth Management financial planner Matthew Murawski explains, a new generation of investors may usher in a new investment strategy.

“We have a big shift in demographics,” Murawski says. “The Baby Boomer advisor has almost all classic mutual funds. But now, an exchange-traded fund does the same basic principle, but they are typically a lot less expensive and are more transparent and tax efficient.”

One of the most important distinctions between mutual funds and ETFs are the costs associated with each. Although Murawski still uses a few mutual funds, most of his portfolio contains ETFs – for the simple reason that they are generally less expensive and more efficient in his opinion.

“There are zero trading costs for an ETF,” Murawski says. “I can buy the S&P 500 index ETF for about a .03 expense ratio and not pay a commission. I can buy it or sell it whenever I want. But if I buy the same thing in a mutual fund, I’m going to pay a $12, $14, $16 commission every time through our custodian, TD Ameritrade.”

With many Baby Boomer investors and advisors retiring, the guidance is beginning to shift toward a younger generation. And according to Murawski, new advisors and this new investing class are overwhelmingly choosing ETFs.

“I don’t know anybody under 40 buying mutual funds,” Murawski says. “If I said to a client under 40, we’re buying mutual funds in an account, a majority of them will ask, why aren’t we buying ETFs?”

This gradual transition from mutual funds to ETFs is being seen throughout the investment world. ETF.com has projected that in the near future, ETF assets will exceed mutual fund assets. And traditional mutual fund advisors are beginning to take notice. They are trying to adapt to the changes in the market, as well as changes in investment strategy, to maintain relevance with a new generation of investors.

“In my opinion, investors under 30 will never own mutual funds,” Murawski says. “It would be like selling them a Discman. It is almost out of style. So mutual fund companies are being forced to change and come out with ETF versions of the same mutual funds.”

Another way that mutual fund companies are able to adjust is by offering what they call clean shares – dramatically reducing the cost of buying mutual funds. These represent important changes in the way mutual fund companies compete with the emergence of ETFs.

“In my opinion, In the end, those that are not innovating are losing massive amounts of assets,” Murawski says. “The pandemic alone brought millions of new investors into the market. And I do not feel those investors are not going to buy mutual funds.”

In the end, it comes down to cost and performance – and many actively managed mutual funds are not outperforming their benchmarks enough to justify their cost. Instead, investors are choosing ETFs, which can give them nearly the exact same thing at a lower price.

“When you don’t outperform and you charge more, it’s problematic,” Murawski says. “In my opinion, mutual fund companies are either dying or they’re innovating and moving toward a different structure.”

Matthew Murawski is a financial planner with Goodstein Wealth Management. He provides personalized wealth management advice to the firm’s 401(k) clients as well as his own individual clients. Murawski educates investors to help them work towards being positioned for long-term financial growth.

To learn more about Murawski and Goodstein Wealth Management, visit www.goodsteinwm.com or connect on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.

Business

Click for Counsel: YesLawyer Wants to Make Lawyers as Accessible as Wi-Fi

Published

16 hours ago

April 1, 2026

Matthew Wiles

Photo Courtesy of: YesLawyer

Byline: Andi Stark

For many people facing a legal problem, the most difficult part is not understanding their rights but finding a lawyer willing to speak with them in the first place. Long wait times, unclear pricing, and administrative hurdles often delay even the most basic consultations. YesLawyer, an AI-enabled plaintiff firm operating across all 50 states, is testing whether technology can shorten that gap.

Founded in 2024 by 25-year-old entrepreneur Rob Epstein, the platform offers free intake, automated screening, and, in many cases, same-day conversations with licensed attorneys. The idea is simple: reduce the friction between a client’s first request for help and an actual legal discussion. In this interview, Epstein explains how the system works, where artificial intelligence fits into the process, and what problems the company is trying to address in the broader legal system

Q: When you say you want lawyers to be “as accessible as Wi-Fi,” what does that mean in practical terms?

A: It’s a way of describing speed and availability. Someone dealing with a workplace dispute, a serious injury, or an immigration issue should be able to move from an online form or phone call to a real conversation with counsel in hours, not weeks. YesLawyer is structured so that a client begins with a free case evaluation, goes through automated conflict checks and basic screening, and, in many instances, speaks with a lawyer the same day.

Q: How does the process work once someone contacts the platform?

A: We use a structured workflow. It starts with a short questionnaire and an initial conversation to capture basic facts. That information feeds into conflict checks and internal review. The system then proposes a match with a licensed attorney and provides a calendar link for a virtual consultation, often within 24 hours. After the meeting, the client receives a written legal plan outlining next steps, deadlines, and estimated fees.

Q: Where does artificial intelligence fit into that process, and where does it stop?

A: AI is used for organizing and routing information, not for giving legal advice. It helps with conflict checks at scale, case categorization, and structured summaries so attorneys can focus on the substance of the matter. Every consultation is conducted by a licensed lawyer, and all decisions about strategy or next steps are made by humans.

Q: What problem is this model trying to solve in the current legal system?

A: Delay and cost are still major barriers. Many civil plaintiffs face long waits just to get a first appointment, along with high retainers and hourly billing that make early legal advice risky. We try to respond with faster consultations, flat-fee options, and financing. The idea is to remove administrative friction so lawyers spend less time on logistics and more time speaking with clients.

Q: Some critics say platforms like this blur the line between a technology company and a law firm. How do you describe YesLawyer?

A: We describe ourselves as a national, AI-enabled plaintiff firm that connects clients with independent attorneys. That structure does raise regulatory questions, especially around responsibility and oversight. We focus on licensing verification, attorney-written case plans, and clear communication about fees and services.

Q: You’ve said the main bottleneck is “systems” rather than people. What do you mean by that?

A: The issue isn’t that lawyers don’t want to help more people. It’s that the systems around them make it hard to scale their time. Intake, scheduling, and document handling take hours. Automating those parts means attorneys can handle more matters without being overwhelmed by repetitive tasks.

Q: Does this model risk favoring only the most profitable cases?

A: That’s a real concern in legal technology. Automation often works best for repeatable, high-volume disputes. Our view is that lowering administrative cost can actually make it easier to take on smaller or more complex cases that might otherwise be turned away. Whether that holds over time depends on the data.

Measuring Impact Over Time

YesLawyer’s attempt to compress the timeline between inquiry and consultation reflects broader changes in how legal services are being delivered. As artificial intelligence becomes more common in administrative work, firms are experimenting with new ways to reduce wait times and clarify costs.

The company’s early growth suggests that many clients value faster access to an initial conversation, even before considering long-term representation. Whether this platform-based model becomes widely adopted or remains one of several emerging approaches will depend on regulatory developments, lawyer participation, and measurable outcomes for clients. For now, YesLawyer’s experiment highlights a central question in modern legal practice: how quickly can help realistically be made available to the people who need it.